Next Article in Journal
The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Pesticide Use in China
Previous Article in Journal
The Short-Term Efficacy of Straw Incorporation on Soil Detachment in Sloping Farmland
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Phytotoxic Potential of Methyl 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Against Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.): Mechanistic Insights and Implications for Sustainable Weed Management

1
College of Plant Protection, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming 650201, China
2
Germplasm Bank of Wild Species, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650201, China
3
State Key Laboratory of Phytochemistry and Natural Medicines, Kunming Institute of Botany, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650201, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(8), 824; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080824
Submission received: 12 March 2025 / Revised: 3 April 2025 / Accepted: 9 April 2025 / Published: 10 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Protection, Diseases, Pests and Weeds)

Abstract

:
Current management of Ageratina adenophora, a highly invasive weed, relies on synthetic herbicides with environmental and resistance risks, necessitating eco-friendly alternatives. This study evaluated seven phenyl derivatives for phytotoxic activity against A. adenophora via in vitro bioassays. Methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate exhibited potent herbicidal efficacy, achieving 100% mortality in 2-month-old seedlings at 30 mM, 3-month-old seedlings at 100 mM, and wild adult/6-month-old plants at 200 mM within 48 h. At 250 mM, the compound reduced CO2 assimilation by 113.6% and stomatal conductance by 92.2%, indicating severe photosynthetic and transpirational disruption via oxidative stress-mediated chloroplast degradation and stomatal dysfunction. Hormonal profiling revealed significant declines in IAA-ASP, GA1, TZeatin, and TZR, alongside elevated ABA levels, while GA3 remained stable. These hormonal shifts likely drive stomatal closure and metabolic collapse, culminating in plant death. This study provides the first evidence of methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate’s dual-action phytotoxicity—targeting both stomatal regulation and hormonal balance—positioning it as a sustainable biocontrol agent for A. adenophora and potentially other invasive weeds.

1. Introduction

Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.) R.M.King & H.Rob. [Synonym: Eupatorium adenophorum (Spreng.) R.M.King & H.Rob.] is a perennial herbaceous plant that can grow up to 1–3 m tall and which belongs to the family Asteraceae. The species exhibits facultative clonal propagation through adventitious root formation at nodal meristems upon soil contact, facilitating rapid colonization and the establishment of dense monocultural thickets that competitively displace native vegetation. Each plant can produce approximately ten thousand seeds per season, which are usually dispersed by wind, water, and animals [1]. Seeds or rooted branches grow relatively fast in a variety of environments under different site-specific scenarios, such as roadsides, steep slopes, farmland, grassland, wetland along streams, railway embankments, forests, and plantations [2]. This invasive species leads to the displacement of native plant communities through the emission of allelopathic volatile organic compounds (VOCs), thereby promoting the establishment of ecologically destabilizing monocultural stands [3]. A. adenophora, originally endemic to Mexico and Costa Rica, has emerged as a globally invasive species, establishing naturalized populations in over 40 countries spanning Asia, Australia, Africa, and Europe, with significant ecological and economic consequences [2,4,5]. The introduction of this invasive species into Yunnan province of China, during the 1940s is attributed to its translocation from Myanmar [6,7]. Since then, it has spread rapidly throughout western China, including Guizhou, Sichuan, and Guangxi provinces [8], and is still continuing to expand its range in the north and east of China at a rate of 60 km per year [7,9]. This species has been considered a seriously invasive weed in many countries [2].
Benzoic acid derivatives represent a critical class of herbicides engineered for selective weed suppression in monocot-dominated agro-ecosystems, notably in Triticum aestivum and Zea mays cultivation [10]. While current derivatives like sethoxydim and quizalofop exhibit relatively low toxicity [11], emerging hydroxybenzoic acid analogs, such as methyl 2-hydroxy-3-phenylpropanoate, demonstrate potent phytotoxicity via ROS–auxin signaling disruption, rivaling glyphosate in efficacy [12]. These compounds, including antiviral agents like 2-(4-hydroxybenzoyl) quinazoline-4(3H)-one [13], underscore the dual agrochemical potential of benzoic acid derivatives. Crucially, their physiological impacts extend to stomatal regulation, a key focus of this study. Stomata mediate CO2 uptake for Calvin cycle-driven carbon fixation and oxygen release during photosynthesis [14,15], processes vulnerable to pesticide-induced hormonal imbalances [16,17]. For instance, excessive herbicide concentrations can trigger stomatal closure, limiting CO2 availability and impairing RuBP regeneration [18,19,20], thereby reducing photosynthetic efficiency. Concurrently, restricted oxygen efflux elevates leaf O2 levels, exacerbating photorespiration that depletes photosynthetic energy reserves [21]. These findings establish a clear gap between the herbicidal efficacy of hydroxybenzoic acid derivatives and their underexplored stomatal modulation mechanisms.
This study profoundly evaluates the herbicidal potential of hydroxybenzoic acid derivatives against A. adenophora, employing a phytochemical screening approach to identify leading compounds with selective inhibitory activity for invasive weed management. By applying different concentrations of these compounds, this study systematically evaluates their impact on the growth status of A. adenophora and examines the effects of effective compounds on cell viability, CO2 assimilation rate, stomatal conductance, and plant hormone levels. Here, we aim to address the following key questions: (1) which compound can effectively inhibit the growth of A. adenophora, and does its effect exhibit a dose-dependent relationship? (2) What is the effect of this compound on the photosynthesis and stomatal regulation of A. adenophora? (3) What changes have occurred in the levels of plant hormones? This study will establish a foundational framework for the development of targeted biochemical strategies to mitigate the proliferation of A. adenophora, offering critical insights into novel phytotoxic mechanisms for sustainable invasive species management.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Compound Screening

The compound screening experiment was conducted between 2021 and 2024 in Kunming, Yunnan province (102.739° E, 25.139° N), China by using wild adult A. adenophora plants. Seeds of wild A. adenophora were collected and sown in the greenhouse of the Germplasm Bank at the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Seven phenyl compounds including ethylparaben, methylparaben, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid, 4-hydroxyphenylacetic acid, methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, ethyl benzoate, and 2-(4-hydroxyphenyl) ethanol were screened (purchased from Shanghai Aladdin Reagent Co., Shanghai, China).
The compounds exhibit limited aqueous solubility, necessitating the utilization of organic solvents—including ethanol, methanol, diethyl ether, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and petroleum ether—for effective dissolution and subsequent experimental applications (purchased from Shanghai Aladdin Reagent Co., Shanghai, China). Due to relatively low environmental impacts, ethanol was chosen as the solvent to minimize environmental pollution in the present experiment. Different phenyl compounds require different concentrations of ethanol for dissolution. While we are searching for effective compounds to control A. adenophora, we are also mindful of testing whether ethanol is harmful to the plants or has any other negative impacts. The compound was administered exclusively through foliar application to the entire leaf surface under controlled experimental conditions, with rigorous measures implemented to minimize soil infiltration and prevent cross-contamination.
Each compound was sprayed on the leaves of mature A. adenophora plants at concentrations of 50 mM, 100 mM, 150 mM, 200 mM, and 250 mM. The reaction of the plants was checked at 48 h after spraying.
Since only methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate significantly inhibited the growth of A. adenophora (see Results Section), we then further screened only this compound’s function on 2-month-old and 3-month-old seedlings using different concentrations. Two-month-old seedlings were sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate at concentrations of 5 mM, 10 mM, 20 mM, and 30 mM. Three-month-old seedlings were sprayed with concentrations of 40 mM, 60 mM, 80 mM, and 100 mM. For 6-month-old plants, the applied concentrations were 100 mM, 150 mM, 200 mM, and 250 mM. All treatments were repeated using 5–16 plants. For 6-month-old plants, 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate can effectively kill the whole plant within 48 h, so it was then used in subsequent physiological index detection experiments.

2.2. Cell Viability and Apoptosis Detection

Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) can be used to detect plant cell structure, dynamics, and the process of cell death [22]. This microscope generates three-dimensional images of cells using fluorescence signals [23]. Since only young leaves are suitable for observation using CLSM, we used the topmost fully expanded leaves of 4-month-old A. adenophora plants for the experiment. One leaf was sprayed with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, while another leaf was left untreated as a control. We observed the changes in the treated and control leaves at 0 min, 10 min, 30 min, 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min.
The selected leaves were cut with scissors and placed into petri dishes containing double-distilled water (ddH2O), gently rinsed, and the water was removed. The excess water was blotted off with filter paper. Next, the leaves were immersed in a 1:1 mixture of FDA (fluorescein diacetate) and PI (propidium iodide) in the dark for 2–3 min. Afterward, the leaves were taken out and cut into small pieces about 0.5 cm wide and 1 cm long using a scalpel. These pieces were placed on a microscope slide, covered with a coverslip, and observed under a laser confocal microscope, Olympus FV1000, Tokyo (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Under blue light excitation at approximately 490 nm, living cells in the leaf appeared green and were clearly visible. Under green light excitation at 550–590 nm, dead cells appeared red. This method allowed us to observe the timing of cell death in the leaf.

2.3. Stomatal Conductance and CO2 Assimilability Measurement

Twelve A. adenophora plants at 6 months old were randomly selected. The 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate was sprayed on six of the plants, while the other six plants were left untreated as a control group. Gas exchange data of the leaves were measured using one fully expanded upper leaf chosen from each plant to record the leaf gas exchange readings. Before the measurements, the leaves were allowed to acclimate to the surrounding environmental conditions, and care was taken not to touch the leaf surface to avoid stomatal closure. Ambient temperature was regulated at 18–25 °C between 11:00 and 15:00 h throughout the experimental protocol to ensure consistency in environmental conditions.
Gas exchange was measured using a portable open-path infrared gas analyzer system (LI-6400XT; Li-Cor Bioscience, Lincoln, NE, USA), with an added leaf chamber fluorometer (Li-Cor Part No. 6400-40, closed leaf area: 2 cm2). The system’s gas flow was set at 300 mmol min−1, and the light intensity was set to saturation (1000 μmol m−2 s−1, with 10% blue light and 90% red light). After a 5-min light adaptation period, the net CO2 assimilation rate and stomatal conductance were measured under the conditions of 1500 μmol photons m−2 s−1 light intensity and 400 μmol mol−1 CO2 concentration, respectively. These measurements were used to check the stomatal conductance of the plant leaves.

2.4. Hormone Detection

After spraying 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, the above-ground parts of 4-month-old A. adenophora plants were collected to extract six plant hormones: indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), abscisic acid (ABA), gibberellins (GA1 and GA3), and cytokinins (trans-zeatin (TZeatin) and trans-zeatin riboside (TZR)), with measurements taken at 0 min, 30 min, 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min post-treatment. The average data from three replicate experiments were recorded. Additionally, the hormone levels were also examined following the spraying of 20% alcohol to form a control group. The plant tissues were ground using liquid nitrogen, soaked in a solvent (methanol:formic acid:water = 15:1:4), and the hormones extracted using the solid-phase extraction separation method. Then, a High-Performance Liquid Chromatograph (AGILENT 1290, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used to accurately separate, identify, and quantify a variety of plant hormones [24].
The extraction and determination of the six hormones were conducted by Nanjing Weibo Technology Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (Nanjing, China), using the previously described methodology of Kojima et al., 2009 and Liu et al., 2010 [24,25].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

All data were analyzed using Excel software v11.0 (Microsoft, Washington, DC, USA). Two-sample Student’s t-tests (two-tailed, assuming equal variances) were performed to compare means between treatment and control groups, with significance set at p < 0.05. Dose–response relationships were evaluated via linear regression analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Compound Screening Results

The effects of ethylparaben, methylparaben, 4-hydroxybenzoic acid, 4-hydroxyphenylacetic acid, methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, ethyl benzoate, and 2-(4-hydroxyphenyl) ethanol on wild adult A. adenophora plants at different concentrations are as follows: when the compound concentration is 50 mM or 100 mM or lower, plant growth remains normal within 48 h, with no abnormal reactions being observed. However, when the concentration increases to 150 mM, the buds of A. adenophora sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate died at 48 h after treatment, while no significant reactions were observed in plants sprayed with the other six compounds. At a concentration of 200 mM, after spraying methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, the young buds, tender leaves, and young stems of A. adenophora showed wilting symptoms 5 h later. After 48 h, the tender leaves and young stems of A. adenophora withered. However, for the plants sprayed with the other six compounds, only a few buds withered (Figure 1 and Figure 2). When the concentration was increased to 250 mM, the young buds, tender leaves, and young stems of A. adenophora showed wilting symptoms 1 h later and withered after 24 h, but it still had no effect on the old leaves and old stems.
For 2-month-old A. adenophora seedlings, when 5 mM, 10 mM, and 20 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate were sprayed, plants grew largely normally within 48 h. After spraying with 30 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, a few of leaves began to wilt by 5 h, a large number of leaves wilted after 24 h, and most leaves of the plants or the whole plants wilted after 48 h (Figure 3).
For 3-month-old seedlings, when 40 mM, 60 mM, and 80 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate were sprayed, plants grew largely normally within 48 h. However, when treated with an 100 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, a few of leaves began to wilt after 5 h, a large number of leaves wilted after 24 h, and all seedlings died within 48 h (Figure 4).
For 6-month-old seedlings, when 100 mM and 150 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate were sprayed, plants grew largely normally within 48 h. At a concentration of 200 mM, the topmost two pairs of leaves died within 48 h. At a concentration of 250 mM, all plants began to wilt within 1 h, and were completely dead within 48 h (Figure 5).
In the control experiment, alcohol at concentrations of 20% showed no significant effect on the growth of A. adenophora (Figure 3 and Figure 4).

3.2. Cell Vitality and Apoptosis Time

The topmost fully expanded leaves sprayed with a 250 mM solution of methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate began to turn dark green within 30 min and completely wilted within 240 min (Figure 6(A1–A6)).
Regarding cell vitality, no changes were observed within 10 min after spraying with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate (Figure 6(B2,C2)). Within 30 min, the number of green, viable cells decreased (Figure 6(B3,C3)). After 1 h, red and dead cells appeared (Figure 6(B4,C4)). After 2 h, the number of red and dead cells significantly increased (Figure 6(B5,C5)). Similarly, at the 4 h timepoint, fluorescein diacetate (FDA) staining revealed the complete absence of viable (green) cells in treated samples, with propidium iodide (PI) confirming universal cell death (red fluorescence) (Figure 6(B6,C6)).

3.3. CO2 Assimilation Rate and Stomatal Conductance

Before spraying 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate on 6-month-old A. adenophora, the leaf CO2 assimilation rate of the control group and the treatment group were almost identical, at 4.886 μmol m−2 s−1 and 5.159 μmol m−2 s−1, respectively (Figure 7A and Table S1). One hour after spraying, the CO2 assimilation rate of the control group slightly decreased to 4.551 μmol m−2 s−1, while that of the treatment group sharply dropped to a negative value of −0.701 μmol m−2 s−1. Two and four hours after spraying, the control group showed a slight reduction to 3.537 μmol m−2 s−1 and 3.314 μmol m−2 s−1, while the treatment group remained negative at −0.672 μmol m−2 s−1 and −0.433 μmol m−2 s−1. At the fourth hour of the experiment, the CO2 assimilation rate of the control group decreased by a maximum of 32.2%, while at the first hour, the CO2 assimilation rate of the treatment group decreased by a maximum of 113.6%. This finding demonstrates that the pesticide exerted a significant inhibitory effect on the CO2 assimilation rate in A. adenophora foliage within one hour post-application, suggesting rapid physiological disruption of photosynthetic machinery.
The stomatal conductance of A. adenophora leaves before and after spraying with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate is shown in Figure 7 and Table S2. Before spraying, the stomatal conductance of the control group and the treatment group were almost identical, at 0.153 mol m−2 s−1 and 0.149 mol m−2 s−1, respectively. One hour after spraying, both groups showed a decreasing trend, with the control group dropping to 0.130 mol m−2 s−1, while the treatment group sharply declined to 0.038 mol m−2 s−1. Two and four hours after spraying, the control group showed stomatal conductance of 0.052 mol m−2 s−1 and 0.051 mol m−2 s−1, while the treatment group exhibited a more severe decline at 0.012 mol m−2 s−1 and 0.015 mol m−2 s−1, as shown in Figure 7B. At the fourth hour of the experiment, the stomatal conductance of the control group decreased by a maximum of 67.0%, while at the second hour, the stomatal conductance of the treatment group decreased by a maximum of 92.2%.

3.4. Hormonal Changes

After spraying 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate (treatment group) and 20% ethanol (control group), the changes in six hormones in A. adenophora are shown in Figure 8 and Table S3. Abscisic acid (ABA): the ABA content in the plants of the treatment group increased at 30 min, then decreased at 60 min. After 120 min and 240 min, the ABA content increased again and ultimately exceeded the normal value. In the control group, the ABA content was lower than the normal value after 240 min. Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA): after 30 min of spraying, the IAA content in both the treatment group and the control group decreased. At 120 min, the IAA content in both groups increased slightly, but by 240 min, the IAA content in both groups decreased significantly. Gibberellin 1 (GA1): the GA1 content in both the treatment group and the control group decreased sharply at 60 min. In the treatment group, the GA1 content increased slightly at 120 min and then decreased extremely significantly at 240 min. In the control group, the content increased at 120 min and returned to the normal level at 240 min. Gibberellin 3 (GA3): after a significant decrease in content at 30 min after spraying the treatment group, the content increased at 60 min, 120 min, and 240 min, but it was still lower than the normal value at the end. In the control group, the content decreased at 30 min and 60 min, increased at 120 min and 240 min, and finally approached the normal value. Trans-zeatin (TZeatin): in the treatment group, the TZeatin content increased slightly at 30 min and then decreased, decreased significantly at 120 min, and finally increased slightly at 240 min. In the control group, the TZeatin content increased at 30 min and then began to decrease, increased sharply at 120 min, decreased again later, and returned to the normal level at 240 min. Trans-zeatin Riboside (TZR): in the treatment group, the TZR content increased slightly at 30 min and then decreased continuously, and decreased extremely significantly at 240 min. In the control group, the change of TZR was similar to that in the control group of TZeatin.

4. Discussion

In this study, we examined the inhibitory effects of seven phenyl compounds on the growth of A. adenophora, and the results showed that the methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate exhibited a significant inhibitory effect on the growth of this species. Methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate is widely present in the extracts of various plants, fungi, and actinomycetes [26,27,28,29,30], and has been used as an intermediate in chemical synthesis for a long time [31,32,33]. However, studies on its biological function on plant growth are relatively limited in the context of biochemical control. While Shen et al. (2013) previously demonstrated the inhibitory activity of methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate against tobacco mosaic virus [13], this study provides the first empirical evidence of its phytotoxic efficacy in suppressing A. adenophora growth, underscoring its potential as a dual-function agent for targeted plant growth regulation and sustainable invasive weed management.
The experimental results indicated that the CO2 assimilation rate of A. adenophora leaves rapidly dropped to a negative value 60 min after the compound application, suggesting that the pesticide had already caused damage to the leaves. The phenomenon of negative CO2 assimilation rate following compound application is typically due to the compound interfering with the plant’s physiological processes, thereby hindering photosynthesis [34]. The phytotoxic effects observed are likely attributable to herbicide-induced cellular degradation and necrosis in foliar tissues, which disrupt chloroplast ultrastructure and consequently impair photosynthetic efficiency [34]. On the other hand, in some cases, this may even lead to a situation where the consumption of photosynthetic products exceeds the CO2 absorption, ultimately resulting in a negative CO2 assimilation rate [34,35,36].
Stomata play a crucial role in plant photosynthesis, serving as the primary channels for carbon dioxide (CO2) absorption and water vapor transpiration [37]. When plants face external stressors, they need to regulate the balance between carbon dioxide absorption and water evaporation through stomatal movement control [38]. In our study, the control group also showed a decrease in stomatal conductance after 120 min, mainly due to intense sunlight potentially causing an increase in leaf temperature, which intensified water evaporation. The plant then regulates stomatal conductance and closes some stomata to reduce excessive water loss [39]. In the treatment group, stomatal conductance sharply decreased 60 min after spraying, primarily because, after the compound application, the plant might have experienced oxidative stress, root or leaf damage, and other phenomena, which in turn trigger defense responses. By regulating the synthesis of plant hormones such as auxins, the plant closes the stomata to reduce water loss and prevent harmful substances from continuing to enter the plant [40,41]. The dynamic modulation of stomatal guard cell aperture represents a critical adaptive mechanism by which plants mitigate environmental stressors, mediated through phytohormone-regulated ion channel gating that governs transmembrane solute flux. Stomatal closure is mainly due to anion release and/or Ca2+ uptake, which leads to plasma membrane depolarization (the membrane potential moves toward a more positive value) [42]. This depolarization phenomenon drives the reduction of K+ and malate, promoting the release of water from guard cells and their contraction, thus closing the stomata [42,43,44]. These processes are regulated by hormones within the plant, with abscisic acid (ABA), auxin (IAA), and gibberellin (GA) playing key roles [45,46,47].
Among the six phytohormones assayed, abscisic acid (ABA) exhibited a singular significant increase in concentration. ABA accumulation serves a dual physiological role: it induces stomatal closure to minimize transpirational water loss and fortifies the plant’s defense by restricting the influx of deleterious exogenous agents through compromised epidermal barriers. In the ABA-induced stomatal closure process, the open stomata 1 kinase increases, and the levels of reactive oxygen species, nitric oxide, and Ca2+ rise, which in turn activate Ca2+-dependent CDPKs, promoting ion efflux in guard cells and forcing the stomata to close [48,49]. Stomatal closure and the influence of hormones may be one of the earlier steps in the defense response and an essential component of the plant’s innate immune response [50,51].
The levels of the other five hormones decreased sharply or fluctuated after spraying. The herbicide can inhibit the synthesis or transport of IAA, leading to a decrease in IAA levels, which in turn affects the normal opening and closing of stomata. IAA usually promotes stomatal opening, while ABA promotes stomatal closure. When plants encounter oxidative stress or water stress caused by herbicides, the increase in IAA may interact with the increase in ABA. Although indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) has been reported to promote stomatal opening under specific conditions, the antagonistic role of abscisic acid (ABA) dominates stomatal closure, particularly under abiotic stress [52]. The decrease in IAA content may be due to its interaction with ethylene concentration, which inhibits the plant’s transpiration and stomatal conductance, leading to stomatal closure [52]. The level of gibberellin (GA) activity significantly affects plant transpiration and related physiological processes. Low GA activity influences transpiration through several mechanisms: first, by inhibiting cell division and elongation, thus reducing leaf area; second, by increasing the response to ABA in guard cells, directly promoting stomatal closure; and third, by reducing xylem proliferation and expansion, lowering the hydraulic conductance of the xylem. In tomatoes, reduced GA activity also promotes stomatal closure, thereby reducing water loss under conditions of water deficit [53]. An increase in cytokinin levels can induce the expression of photoreceptors related to stomatal opening, while inhibiting the biosynthesis and signaling of abscisic acid (ABA), thereby enhancing plant stomatal conductance. In addition, cytokinins strictly regulate the biosynthesis of chlorophyll and the expression of key proteins involved in the assembly and activation of ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase (Rubisco), helping plants maintain an appropriate photosynthetic rate under drought stress conditions [54]. Herbicide-induced phytotoxicity in plants is modulated through complex phytohormonal crosstalk, yet the multifactorial mechanisms governing these interactions remain poorly characterized, necessitating comprehensive investigation to elucidate underlying regulatory networks.

5. Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate exhibits significant phytotoxic activity against A. adenophora seedlings, positioning it as a viable candidate for sustainable management of this invasive species. Further analysis revealed its disruptive effects on stomatal dynamics and phytohormonal profiles in mature A. adenophora plants. This compound significantly affected the plant’s physiological functions by damaging leaf photosynthesis and stomatal conductance. This compound also significantly increased the concentration of hormones, as in ABA, and decreased hormones, as in IAA, GA1, GA3, TZeatin, and TZR. Future studies could further explore the mechanism of action of this compound and assess its potential in plant protection and pest control. Compared to other chemical herbicides, methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate may become a herbicide with lower environmental impacts. However, before applying this compound, its impact on other plants and the environment should be evaluated.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture15080824/s1, Tables S1–S3 are Supplementary Materials for this article. Table S1: The change in CO2 assimilation rate before and after spraying 200 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate on A. adenophora plants (Note: a, b, c, d, e, f represents six replicate samples) Table S2: The change in stomatal conductance before and after spraying 200 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate on A. adenophora plants. (Note: a, b, c, d, e, f represents six replicate samples) Table S3: Content of 6 kinds of hormones of A. adenophora after spraying 200 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. (Note: A: the content of each sample; B: the average of three duplicate samples. The data is recorded at different time intervals (30 m, 60 m, 120 m, 240 m, and 0 m as control) and includes measurements for three sets of samples for each condition (P1, P2, P3 for methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; C1, C2, C3 for 20% alcohol; ck1, ck2, ck3 for control).)

Author Contributions

Z.Y., J.Y. and X.G. conceived the ideas and designed the methodology; Z.Y. and X.D. collected the data; Z.Y. analysed the data; M.H., Y.R., Z.Y. and G.W. led manuscript writing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported financially by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 32060639, 32060640, and 32260704); the Reserve Talents Project for Yunnan Young and Middle-Aged Academic and Technical Leaders (202105AC160037 and 202205AC160077); and the Yunnan Province Agricultural Joint Special Key Project (202301BD070001-141).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data can be found in the Supplementary Materials or can be obtained from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Germplasm Bank of Wild Species in Southwest China for providing the greenhouse, and the Molecular Biology Experiment Center of the Germplasm Bank of Wild Species in Southwest China for their technical support. Special thanks are extended to Wei Huang for his guidance in photosynthesis detection and to Yanxia Jia for her guidance in using the laser confocal microscope.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Parsons, W.T.; Cuthbertson, E.G. Noxious Weeds of Australia, 2nd ed.; CSIRO Publishing: Collingwood, Australia, 2001; pp. 239–242. [Google Scholar]
  2. Poudel, A.S.; Jha, P.K.; Shrestha, B.B.; Muniappan, R. Biology and management of the invasive weed Ageratina adenophora (Asteraceae): Current state of knowledge and future research needs. Weed Res. 2019, 59, 79–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Xia, Y.; Dong, M.; Yu, L. Compositional and functional profiling of the rhizosphere microbiomes of the invasive weed Ageratina adenophora and native plants. PeerJ 2021, 9, e10844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Heystek, F.; Wood, A.R.; Neser, S. Biological control of two Ageratina species (Asteraceae: Eupatorieae) in South Africa. Afr. Entomol. 2011, 19, 208–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Muniappan, R.; Raman, A.; Reddy, G.V.P. Ageratina adenophora (Sprengel) King and Robinson (Asteraceae). In Biological Control of Tropical Weeds Using Arthropods; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009; pp. 63–73. [Google Scholar]
  6. Dong, S.K.; Cui, B.S.; Yang, Z.F. The role of road disturbance in the dispersal and spread of Ageratina adenophora along the Dian–Myanmar International Road. Weed Res. 2010, 48, 282–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wang, R.; Wang, Y.Z. Invasion dynamics and potential spread of the invasive alien plant species Ageratina adenophora (Asteraceae) in China. Divers. Distrib. 2006, 12, 397–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wan, F.; Liu, W.; Guo, J.; Qiang, S.; Li, B.; Wang, J.; Yang, G.; Niu, H.; Gui, F.; Huang, W.; et al. Invasive mechanism and control strategy of Ageratina adenophora (Sprengel). Life Sci. 2010, 11, 1291–1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gui, F.R.; Wan, F.H.; Guo, J.Y. Determination of the population genetic structure of the invasive weed Ageratina adenophora using ISSR-PCR markers. Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 2009, 56, 410–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhang, T.; Zhao, Q.; Kang, Z.H. Advances in pyrimidiny (oxy) thiobenzoic acid herbicides. Plant Protect. 2018, 44, 22–28. [Google Scholar]
  11. Yi, X.; Chen, Y.; Shu, G. Biological function of Benzoic acid and advances of its application in livestock and poultry production. Siliao Gongye 2023, 44, 13–17. [Google Scholar]
  12. Pimjuk, P.; Noppawan, P.; Katrun, P. New furan derivatives from Annulohypoxylon spougei fungus. Asian Nat. Prod. Res. 2022, 24, 971–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shen, S.; Li, W.; Wang, J. A novel and other bioactive secondary metabolites from a marine fungus Penicillium oxalicum 0312F1. Nat. Prod. Res. 2013, 22, 38. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cohen, S. Effects of plant protection chemicals on leaf gas exchange. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 901–905. [Google Scholar]
  15. Bertin, N.; Ledent, J.F. Effects of pesticide treatments on photosynthesis in maize. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1998, 70, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  16. Zhang, Y.; Xu, L. Effects of pesticides on stomatal behavior and plant growth. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2011, 9, 229–235. [Google Scholar]
  17. Wang, Y.; Li, Q. Interaction of plant growth regulators and environmental stress factors in plant growth and productivity. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 246. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bowes, G.; Ogren, W.L.; Hageman, R.H. Photosynthesis in plants: A review of the Calvin cycle. Plant Physiol. 1971, 48, 295–310. [Google Scholar]
  19. Farquhar, G.D.; Sharkey, T.D. Stomatal control of photosynthesis. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1982, 33, 317–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ainsworth, E.A.; Rogers, A. The response of photosynthesis and stomatal conductance to rising [CO2]: Implications for climate change. Plant Cell Environ. 2007, 30, 258–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, Y.; Wei, Y. The effects of environmental factors on photorespiration and photosynthetic efficiency in plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2014, 105, 11–20. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hepler, P.K.; Gunning, B.E.S. Confocal fluorescence microscopy of plant cells. Protoplasma 1998, 201, 121–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Amos, W.B.; White, J.G. How the confocal laser scanning microscope entered biological research. Biol. Cell 2003, 95, 335–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kojima, M.; Kamada-Nobusada, T.; Komatsu, H. Highly sensitive and high-throughput analysis of plant hormones using MS-probe modification and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry: An application for hormone profiling in Oryza sativa. Plant Cell Physiol. 2009, 50, 1201–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Liu, Z.; Wei, F.; Feng, Y.Q. Determination of cytokinins in plant samples by polymer monolith microextraction coupled with hydrophilic interaction chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Anal. Methods 2010, 2, 1676–1685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mei, R.Q.; Nong, X.H.; Wang, B.; Sun, X.P.; Huang, G.L.; Luo, Y.P.; Zheng, C.J.; Chen, G.Y. A new phenol derivative isolated from mangrove-derived fungus Eupenicillium sp. HJ002. Nat. Prod. Res. 2020, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Pettit, G.R.; Du, J.; Pettit, R.K.; Knight, J.C.; Doubek, D.L. Antineoplastic agents. 575. The fungus Aspergillus phoenicis. Heterocycles 2009, 79, 909–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ribeiro, T.A.N.; Sliva, L.R.; Junior, P.T.S.; Castro, R.N.; Carvalho, M.G. A new cyclopeptide and other constituents from the leaves of Zanthoxylum rigidum Humb. & Bonpl. ex Willd. (Rutaceae). Helv. Chim. Acta 2012, 95, 935–939. [Google Scholar]
  29. Winiewski, V.; Serain, A.F.; Sá, E.L.D.; Salvador, M.J.; Stefanello, M.É.A. Chemical constituents of Sinningia mauroana and screening of its extracts for antimicrobial, antioxidant and cytotoxic activities. Quím. Nova 2020, 43, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rösecke, J.; König, W. Odorous compounds from the fungus Gloeophyllum odoratum. Flavour Fragr. J. 2000, 15, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mendelsohn, B.A.; Ciufolini, M.A. Approach to tetrodotoxin via the oxidative amidation of a phenol. Org. Lett. 2009, 20, 4736–4739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Müller, K.; Reindl, H.; Breu, K. Antipsoriatic anthrones with modulated redox properties. 5. Potent inhibition of human keratinocyte growth, induction of keratinocyte differentiation, and reduced membrane damage by novel 10-arylacetyl-1,8-dihydroxy-9(10H)-anthracenones. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 44, 814–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhao, X.Y.; Chen, H.H.; Xing, S.T.; Yuan, W.; Wu, L.M.; Chen, X.; Zhan, C.G. Regioselective synthesis of 2- and 4-diarylpyridine ethers and their inhibitory activities against phosphodiesterase 4B. J. Mol. Struct. 2019, 1196, 455–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Cunningham, S.D.; Sultana, N. Effects of herbicides on plant growth and photosynthesis. Weed Sci. 1983, 31, 59–62. [Google Scholar]
  35. Barrett, M.; Mudge, D. Herbicide-induced damage to the photosynthetic apparatus. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 2002, 73, 41–49. [Google Scholar]
  36. Mishra, A. Effects of chemical treatments on photosynthetic activity and CO2 assimilation rate in leaves of Eupatorium adenophorum. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2013, 88, 19–26. [Google Scholar]
  37. Lawson, T.; Blatt, M.R. Stomatal size, speed, and responsiveness impact on photosynthesis and water use efficiency. Plant Physiol. 2014, 164, 1556–1570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Munemasa, S.; Shimoishi, Y.; Uozumi, N. Regulation of stomatal closure and opening under environmental stress. Plant Cell Physiol. 2015, 56, 501–508. [Google Scholar]
  39. Cowan, I.R.; Farquhar, G.D. Stomatal function in relation to leaf metabolism and environment. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1977, 28, 47–70. [Google Scholar]
  40. Murch, S.J.; Saxena, P.K. Role of plant hormones in regulating the development of in vitro cultures of plants. Plant Growth Regulation 2000, 31, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  41. Kim, Y.S.; Bressan, R.A. Signal transduction pathways in response to stress. Plant Cell Rep. 2009, 28, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kearns, E.V.; Assmann, S.M. The guard cell-environment connection. Plant Physiol. 1993, 102, 711–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Assmann, S.M. Signal transduction in guard cells, Annu. Rev. Cell Biol. 1993, 9, 345–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Blatt, M.R.; Thiel, G. Hormonal control of ion channel gating. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Mol. Biol. 1993, 44, 543–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Haswell, E.S.; Meyerowitz, E.M. Stomatal development and patterning. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2006, 9, 64–69. [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhou, Y.; Zhang, H. Role of plant hormones in the regulation of water stress tolerance. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2009, 28, 125–132. [Google Scholar]
  47. Finkelstein, R.R.; Rock, C.D. Abscisic acid biosynthesis and response. Plant Cell 2002, 14, 15–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Montillet, J.L.; Leonhardt, N.; Mondy, S.; Tranchimand, S.; Rumeau, D.; Boudsocq, M. An abscisic acid-independent oxylipin pathway controls stomatal closure and immune defense in Arabidopsis. PLoS Biol. 2013, 11, e1001513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ye, W.; Adachi, Y.; Munemasa, S.; Nakamura, Y.; Mori, I.C.; Murata, Y. Open stomata 1 kinase is essential for yeast elicitor-induced stomatal closure in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Physiol. 2015, 56, 1239–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bharath, P.; Gahir, S.; Raghavendra, A.S. Abscisic Acid-Induced Stomatal Closure: An Important Component of Plant Defense Against Abiotic and Biotic Stress. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 615144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lim, C.W.; Baek, W.; Jung, J.; Kim, J.H.; Lee, S.C. Function of ABA in stomatal defense against biotic and drought stresses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 15251–15270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Daszkowska-Golec, A.; Szarejko, I. Open or close the gate–stomata action under the control of phytohormones in drought stress conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2013, 4, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nir, I.; Shohat, H.; Panizel, I.; Olszewski, N.; Aharoni, A.; Weiss, D. The tomato DELLA protein PROCERA acts in guard cells to promote stomatal closure and reduce water loss under water deficiency. Plant Cell 2017, 29, 3186–3197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Gujjar, R.S.; Sharma, S.; Yadav, V. Cytokinin-mediated regulation of abscisic acid biosynthesis and stomatal function in plants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2020, 174, 104020. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Comparison chart of A. adenophora before spraying and 48 h after spraying with four compounds at a concentration of 200 mM. 1: ethylparaben; 2: methylparaben; 3: 4-hydroxybenzoic acid; 4: 4-hydroxyphenylacetic acid; (A) Before spraying; (B) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e represent five replicates for the same treatment.
Figure 1. Comparison chart of A. adenophora before spraying and 48 h after spraying with four compounds at a concentration of 200 mM. 1: ethylparaben; 2: methylparaben; 3: 4-hydroxybenzoic acid; 4: 4-hydroxyphenylacetic acid; (A) Before spraying; (B) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e represent five replicates for the same treatment.
Agriculture 15 00824 g001
Figure 2. Comparison chart of A. adenophora before spraying and 48 h after spraying with three compounds at a concentration of 200 mM. 5: methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 6: ethyl benzoate; 7: 2-(4-Hydroxyphenyl) ethanol; (A) Before spraying; (B) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e represent five replicates for the same treatment.
Figure 2. Comparison chart of A. adenophora before spraying and 48 h after spraying with three compounds at a concentration of 200 mM. 5: methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 6: ethyl benzoate; 7: 2-(4-Hydroxyphenyl) ethanol; (A) Before spraying; (B) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e represent five replicates for the same treatment.
Agriculture 15 00824 g002
Figure 3. Reaction of 2-month-old A. adenophora seedlings sprayed with 30 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Before spraying (A1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol, (A2) seedlings sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 48 h after spraying (B1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol; (B2) seedlings sprayed with 30 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate.
Figure 3. Reaction of 2-month-old A. adenophora seedlings sprayed with 30 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Before spraying (A1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol, (A2) seedlings sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 48 h after spraying (B1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol; (B2) seedlings sprayed with 30 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate.
Agriculture 15 00824 g003
Figure 4. Reaction of 3-month-old A. adenophora seedlings sprayed with 100 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Before spraying (A1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol, (A2) seedlings sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 48 h after spraying (B1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol; (B2) seedlings sprayed with 100 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate.
Figure 4. Reaction of 3-month-old A. adenophora seedlings sprayed with 100 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Before spraying (A1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol, (A2) seedlings sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; 48 h after spraying (B1) seedlings sprayed with 20% alcohol; (B2) seedlings sprayed with 100 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate.
Agriculture 15 00824 g004
Figure 5. Reaction of 6-month-old A. adenophora sprayed with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; (A) Before spraying; (B) 1 h after spraying; (C) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e, f represent six replicates for the same treatment.
Figure 5. Reaction of 6-month-old A. adenophora sprayed with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate; (A) Before spraying; (B) 1 h after spraying; (C) 48 h after spraying; a, b, c, d, e, f represent six replicates for the same treatment.
Agriculture 15 00824 g005
Figure 6. Cell death in 4-month-old A. adenophora observed under a confocal laser scanning microscope after spraying with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Figures (A1A6) show leaves sprayed or not sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. (A1) before spraying; (A2A6) after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively; leaves signed by white arrows sprayed, and opposite leaves signed by red arrows not sprayed. Figures (B1B6) show the living cells (green) in leaves before spraying and after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. Figures (C1C6) show the dead cells (red) in leaves before spraying and after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively.
Figure 6. Cell death in 4-month-old A. adenophora observed under a confocal laser scanning microscope after spraying with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. Figures (A1A6) show leaves sprayed or not sprayed with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. (A1) before spraying; (A2A6) after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively; leaves signed by white arrows sprayed, and opposite leaves signed by red arrows not sprayed. Figures (B1B6) show the living cells (green) in leaves before spraying and after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. Figures (C1C6) show the dead cells (red) in leaves before spraying and after spraying at 10, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively.
Agriculture 15 00824 g006
Figure 7. Changes in CO2 assimilation rate (A) and stomatal conductance (B) of A. adenophora leaves after spraying with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate at 0, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. Red circles show values from plants without spraying; blue triangles show values from plants with spraying. AN: CO2 assimilation rate; gs: stomatal conductance. * is significant. The downward arrow indicates the decrease compared to the data before spraying and the percentage of the decrease.
Figure 7. Changes in CO2 assimilation rate (A) and stomatal conductance (B) of A. adenophora leaves after spraying with 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate at 0, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. Red circles show values from plants without spraying; blue triangles show values from plants with spraying. AN: CO2 assimilation rate; gs: stomatal conductance. * is significant. The downward arrow indicates the decrease compared to the data before spraying and the percentage of the decrease.
Agriculture 15 00824 g007
Figure 8. Differences in the contents of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), abscisic acid (ABA), gibberellins (GA1 and GA3), and cytokinins (trans-zeatin (TZeatin) and trans-zeatin riboside (TZR)): ABA (A), IAA (B), GA1 (C), GA3 (D), TZeatin (E), and TZR (F) in A. adenophora treated with 20% alcohol and 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. The blue rhombus (P) represents the average hormone content after spraying with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, and the red square (CK) represents the average hormone content after spraying with 20% ethanol. At 0, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. FW: fresh weight. * is significant; ** is highly significant.
Figure 8. Differences in the contents of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), abscisic acid (ABA), gibberellins (GA1 and GA3), and cytokinins (trans-zeatin (TZeatin) and trans-zeatin riboside (TZR)): ABA (A), IAA (B), GA1 (C), GA3 (D), TZeatin (E), and TZR (F) in A. adenophora treated with 20% alcohol and 250 mM methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate. The blue rhombus (P) represents the average hormone content after spraying with methyl 4-hydroxyphenylacetate, and the red square (CK) represents the average hormone content after spraying with 20% ethanol. At 0, 30, 60, 120, and 240 min, respectively. FW: fresh weight. * is significant; ** is highly significant.
Agriculture 15 00824 g008
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, Z.; Ding, X.; Yang, J.; Hussain, M.; Ruan, Y.; Gao, X.; Wu, G. Phytotoxic Potential of Methyl 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Against Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.): Mechanistic Insights and Implications for Sustainable Weed Management. Agriculture 2025, 15, 824. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080824

AMA Style

Yang Z, Ding X, Yang J, Hussain M, Ruan Y, Gao X, Wu G. Phytotoxic Potential of Methyl 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Against Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.): Mechanistic Insights and Implications for Sustainable Weed Management. Agriculture. 2025; 15(8):824. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080824

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Zhiyun, Xiao Ding, Junbo Yang, Mehboob Hussain, Yanan Ruan, Xi Gao, and Guoxing Wu. 2025. "Phytotoxic Potential of Methyl 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Against Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.): Mechanistic Insights and Implications for Sustainable Weed Management" Agriculture 15, no. 8: 824. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080824

APA Style

Yang, Z., Ding, X., Yang, J., Hussain, M., Ruan, Y., Gao, X., & Wu, G. (2025). Phytotoxic Potential of Methyl 4-Hydroxyphenylacetate Against Ageratina adenophora (Spreng.): Mechanistic Insights and Implications for Sustainable Weed Management. Agriculture, 15(8), 824. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15080824

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop